Ballots to remain uncounted in MI and Stein blocked in Philly. Guest: Election integrity, law expert Paul Lehto says this proves 'only option is to get it right on Election Night'. Also: Trump taps climate denier, fossil-fuel tool for EPA...

Again, we're always happy to see coverage of the mess concerning Diebold's proven and severe security vulnerabilities as well as the hackable electronic voting machines made by their compatriot (competitor) companies. All of that, as our electoral democracy crumbles out from under us while very few are paying attention or giving a damn even if they are.

Not as happy, however, to see this report as yet another indication that the Fox "News"-ization of WaPo seems to be complete.

In the name of phony "balance" (the word Fox "News" has perpetrated on a gullible public and a terrified mainstream media in order to level decidedly unlevel playing fields to the advantage of the bad guys), today's report, headlined "Debating the Bugs of High-Tech Voting," creates a completely false sense of "balance" in an otherwise unbalanced "debate."

Aside from the article appearing in WaPo at all, the biggest upside to it is this admission in the following graf:

Many of the criticisms of voting technology were originally dismissed as exaggerations promulgated by partisans displeased with election results. But the criticisms have been viewed with increasing gravity as prominent computer scientists have rallied behind them.

Beyond that, however, the article sets up a phony "level playing field" between Computer Scientists, all of whom now criticize the Diebold electronic voting machines --- even folks like Prof. Michael Shamos of Carnegie Mellon who had previously been a major defender of e-voting --- Goldbarb then goes on to frame things as if the points of the defenders of E-Voting (those who have a financial stake it in) are somehow equal to those who have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that that the defenders were lying and/or wrong about E-voting.

With E-Voting vendors and Elections Officials on one side and Computer Scientists and Election Integrity activists on the other, the appearance of a Fox "News" style one side versus the other side debate is created.

Goldfarb even manages to define Elections Officials as "strik[ing] a middle ground" between the vendors and the Election Integrity advocates when he then goes on to quote a spokesperson from CA Sec. of State Bruce McPherson's office repeating preciselywhat Diebold has said publicly about the latest huge security vulnerability discovered in Diebold systems [emphasis ours]:

"There certainly are potential security vulnerabilities that have arisen," said Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for California's secretary of state. "But you have to be realistic about it: When you're administrating elections, there's a very low risk of any" tampering.

That ain't a "middle ground", that's Diebold propoganda.

Here's a quote from a letter sent by Diebold to states after they could no longer conceal the vulnerability problems from the public. Note the similarities to Kerns quote above:

The probability for exploiting this vulnerability to install un-authorized software that could affect an election is considered low.

You can see the full Diebold letter, and the nearly identical (word-for-word!) "Directive" from Pennsylvania officials, who struck that same "middle ground" when they had to deal with the problem just days before their recent primary elections right here.

Beyond that, the article goes on to quote Diebold spokesman/known-liar, David Bear, repeating his same old "there are no evil election officials" canard, while otherwise doing a nice job, at least, of pointing out Shamos' apparent about-face concerning the security on these machines, after he had once been an ardent supporter/defender of e-voting.

Bottom-line, however: This is not an even debate. Nor even a "debate" at all!

The Computer Scientists and Election Integrity Advocates have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Diebold voting machines, both optical scan and touch-screen, are hackable and unsecure. They have also been federally certified despite violating federally created standards for certification. They should be decertified immediately at the federal level on that basis alone.

The other side is not debating. They are spinning in an attempt to downplay the issue as "not all that important."

That's not a debate. That is FACT versus SPIN and coverage of these issues ought to be clear on that. Especially from Washington Post where we'd expect them to be a bit more honest than Fox "News". But perhaps it's time to simply do away that expectation once and for all.

Sorry Brad, but you keep clinging to the OLD definitions of "debate".. See, we've not had a DEBATE on almost ANY issue in decades.. It's been spin versus fact all this time.. it's just that now.. they can't hide it as veiled fact anymore because we've gotten so far into lala land that even fact has become a foriegn concept to most Americans.

Some day, maybe.. before I die.. America will be a great country again.. full of people striving to work hard and earn a decent living. Willing to have the hard talks like civilized people.

Give credit where credit is due Brad: YOU state Zachary A. Goldfarb has provided "some decent coverage on some of these issues in the past." May 30, 2006: this is an example of shit head New Amerikan journalism 101. Maybe you can send him an email with your blog information attached to get this man up to speed since his article fails to get something out called the truth. Unless he publically apologizes for spreading this Bushit information, he is just another scum-bag ruster with a bullhorn on the payroll without any journalistic integrity.

Brad, thanks for pointing out the spin of this WaPo article. We are so surrounded by spin, spin, spin that it can become difficult to see it for what it is.

Fact-based journalism seems to be largely a thing of the past. It is now kosher to get both "sides" to a story and present them with equal validity, without bothering to discover where the truth lies.

The media is content to repeat someone's lies, and call that "news". As RLM says, it is sickening.

Combine that with an increasingly authoritarian system that tolerates no questiong or disagreement (haven't our schools trained us well), and we are in deep, deep trouble if we hope to restore our democracy at some point in the future.

Take the case of an SUV that someone unfortunately discovers turns over too easily because the tires that come with it are prone to blow outs.

Does GM take "one side", the dead and injured take the "other side", and elected officials take the middle ground to make a "balanced" debate of it?

Is GM allowed to say "these failures only occur when drivers are of a certain age group", the dead and injured object to that characterization, and the politicians say lets compromise?

Hell no.

GM issues a recall, or class-action lawsuits take place, and perhaps court injunctions and punitive damages take place. The situation is intolerable no matter what age group is killed and maimed more than any other. It is irrelevant.

Why should the electronic voting machine world be any different? Why should the issue be framed by politicians or vendors? If there is a security problem it must be fixed.

The election system must be secure and not faith based. We do not do elections based on "trust me" dynamics.

Just like the SUV's, recall the machines and work to fix them until they are secure, as determined by scientists like Prof. Michael Shamos and Harry Hursti.

Make sure watchdog groups like BBV and VR are also comfortable with it. And keep after the FEC until it has formulated rules for mandating security, and until those rules are strictly enforced.

Public money used to purchase voting machines must be spent with at least as much dignity as money used to purchase an SUV.

The recall injects a sense of honesty and consumer confidence into the purchase of the SUV, and there surely should be as much "consumer confidence" in the purchase of election machines.

The reason is that upon these machines stands or falls the very democracy, freedom, and accountability of the US government and the American people.

Lets use what we already know about "unsafe at any speed" and the entire consumer safety movement.

Lets translate or transfer that into "unsafe at any precinct" and a robust election machine integrity and security movement.

This is like the border issue. They are arguing whether or not to legalize the illegal aliens, instead of securing the borders and penalizing corporations for hiring illegal aliens which draws them here.

I think every regular on this site is trained to detect the "framing" and "spin" of anything. Pat yourselves on the back. The framers & spinners put the arguement they want in the media, not the real arguement. They should teach this in school, to kids. Call it "Bullshit Detection 101."

Overall, I think that electronic voting is a good idea because it makes it easier & quicker to vote and tabulate the results.

However, that assumes that the people in control of tabulating election results are benovelent (honest) individuals. Which is apparently NOT the case... Most of us know some of the sordid history of Diebold: when their CEO "guaranteed" that his home state's electoral votes would go to Bush. when MS-Access .mdb files from the Diebold system were found on an unprotected ftp site. Analysis of the database files indicated that there were TWO tables of votecounts used, making surreptitious manipulation of the vote much easier, if one were so inclined...

If electronic voting machines are to be used (and it appears that they will be), there should be a bipartisan and independent group defined whose job would be to setup and maintain security standards for election software. The source code for the sofware being used should be placed in the public domain.

It should not be left in the hands of companies such as Diebold to police themselves.

Earth to Jennifer: These are the same people who haven't yet explained to us what really happened on 9/11. They're the same people who used 9/11 as a pretext for invading a sovereign country that posed no threat to us, with a nighttime bombing raid that killed women and children in their beds.
They're the same people who authorized the torture of detainees and spied on you and me illegally. They're the same people who kidnapped people off the street in foreign countries and sent them to be tortured, and maintained secret prisons in foreign countries. They're the same people who tell the truth only be accident.

And you honestly think they'd hestitate to steal an election or two to further their purposes? Did you ever go to school, girl?

Oh now. Let's not be too hard on the gop. Look how kind & forgiving they can be, even to a (gasp!) recent felon:

"Lead figure in phone jam to advise GOP contenders"

"A major figure in the Election Day phone-jamming scandal that embarrassed and nearly bankrupted the New Hampshire GOP is out of prison and back in the political game.

Charles McGee, the former executive director of the state Republican Party, pleaded guilty to conspiracy and served seven months for his part in the scheme to have a telemarketer tie up Democratic and union phone lines in 2002.

He's back at his old job with a Republican political marketing firm, Spectrum Monthly & Printing Inc., and will be helping out at the firm's "GOP campaign school" for candidates..."link

THAT'S NOT A STORY ON WHAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS BECOME??? The GOP is saying "Fuck You" to America, by still employing a guy convicted of disenfranchising voters!!!!!!!!! That is right up there, with the most audacious things the Republicans have been doing! Pelosi asked Jefferson to step down, and he wasn't convicted yet. The Republicans HIRE a F***ing convicted vote disenfranchizer!!!!!!!!!

Atitude check: rEPUBLIDEM ETHOS - We will do what we want to do and NO ONE IS GONNA STOP US. The Bushit administration: loser destroyers of our world selling off our US WILD LANDS defies wisdom BUT THESE CRIMINALS REMAIN IN POWER. a Slap on the wrist only when they have to get caught And REMAIN ABOVE THE LAW. We must come together as a voice of reason to remove these lying murderers or they will continue their reign of terror against the American people, countries of the world, and all other species who inhabit planet earth. We will take back our country and save the world!!!

Amy Goodman broadcast from Stanford today, and did a big segment on e-voting and Diebold vulnerabilities. I kept thinking that YOU should have been the one interviewed, since you've been the one obsessed with this issue for so long!

They can do the above, but there is an alternative: LINK-TV & FSTV. Fuck 'em, let 'em takeover the MSM more, we have alternatives now!!! If the watchdogs can't stop them, which they are supposed to, we have alternatives now.

Blaming equally the dems for what the repubs are doing FAR more is a result of that schooling.

It is like framing a "balanced" issue on faux news. The MSM frames it as corruption that by some mysterious "law of nature" must happen equally to dems and repubs. Yet they do not mention that they are the ones that made up that mysterious "law of nature" ... in other words the framed the issue in the deceitful tradition of faux news.

Never mind that the facts show clearly that the republican dictatorship is no where near the corruption level of any other party. No, they are the Supremely Corrupt Party hands down.

So those of you who fancy yourself as beyond psyops should begin to detect the virus in your thinking. It even shows up here.

Corruption is a personal matter, not a political party matter. However, once a party is infected and it does not go into emergency innoculation mode, the infection will spread.

The dems have shown far greater resistance but the republican dictatorship has warmly welcomed the corruption.

Bradblog got a commentor, sweet sounding lady, this a.m. on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal" re: Rove ... lap-top computer ... changing election results. When questioned, she said she was referring to Karl's personal assistant, Susan Ralston, and did not seem to be aware that Ralston was formerly Abramoff's secretary. She said there's a picture of the two of them sitting there with the laptop, doing their dastardly deed.

She gave it a good try, but didn't come across as too informed. New blogger maybe, but I'll give her a passing grade for effort, and sincerity.

The lady said: She gets ALL of her news from Truthout and Bradblog, but I caught her eavesdropping over at C-SPAN!

(She gave your URL as Bradblog.org, which can be an easy slip of the tongue.)

You said "that assumes that the people in control of tabulating election results are benovelent (honest) individuals. Which is apparently NOT the case."

This is not the best way to frame the debate.

The debate is whether election machines will be afforded the same scrutiny as other consumer products. For instance heart machines. Would you like to be hooked up to a heart machine that is governed by quality control rules that are prefaced with "do these rules if you want to, don't do them if you don't want to".

Or your SUV ... what if safety was a voluntary matter?

It would not be easy to frame and debate the issue if we said "those who sell SUV's must be bad people because" ... NO! ... the issue is "are the machines safe for consumers as they MUST BY LAW be"?

Could the Silence of The Goats be the result of a NSL? It could happen!

The republican dictatorship has silenced the Librarians in the United States with a little known fascist trick called the NSL:

"The NSL is a little known statute in the Patriot Act that permits law enforcement to obtain records of people not suspected of any wrongdoing and without a court order. As part of the NSL, those served with the document are gagged and prohibited from disclosing that they have even been served" (Raw Story link, bold added).

So why not, at the behest of Diebold and other republican dictatorship pals, stop the people from knowing about the Train Wreck?

Regardless of the article’s slant, Michael Shamos' quotes signal an important shift for him. Being quoted on corporate laxity or negligence is new for Shamos as is the concern expressed that elections should not be vulnerable to an individual’s tampering.
He has a prominent role in the Pennsylvania Department State’s voting machine testing or certification process. Recently the Department of State has been quite busy dealing with HAVA (Help America Vote ACT) compliance. Computer scientists in general have been neglected on electronic voting but Shamos and a few others are now gaining recognition in the mainstream media.

Of course we’re in trouble a la Fox News style coverage. But these quotes and others by Shamos in the traditional media could be quite helpful for those who are actively dealing with the impact of DRE’s (Direct Registry Electronic voting machines) on voting protection and security in a largely --- but by no means completely --- sleeping Pennsylvania.
The mainstream media’s recent coverage of electronic voting more than suggests a story that can no longer be ignored.

Keep in mind that this isn't starting to worry the media until it affects the Republican party. We'll see how much coverage the problem gets come election time when Democrats seem to lose despite exit polls giving them a healthy margin.

Or, I perdict that should the Dems manage to regain the majority, the media will blame the faulty election machines.

Hate to be the eternal sceptic, but the media is desperate to defend Bush and the Republicans these days. So much show, they aren't even just slightly slanting to the right anymore. They are actively doing everything they can do destroy Liberals and hype up conservatives. The fact that the media is starting to finally wake up to this issue (after 2 years of evidence being ignored) only tells me that they are preparing their narrative for the elections this year. Dems win and it will be blamed on faulty voting machiens. Republicans win and it will be because they addressed the issue quick enough to fix the problem.

And what can we do to collect evidence anywhere there is no paper trail?

Are we up for having 2 - 3 people at each precinct (because they'll steal votes everywhere - Ohio counties that were supposed to come out 55-45 Bush in '04 came out 60 or 65% Bush - - and nobody stopped to ask about those as they were busy working the inner city beats.... - they stole votes in California, just to try to "win" the popular vote as well as the electoral college...) to ask folks to vote in a parrallel election on paper?
Would this be a reasonable thing to do?
If folks signed their names that they voted for a certain candidate, and the official numbers come out differently, what then?

They still can’t put a face, (or voice) on Bruce Funk, but they can put one, on people like Bear and Shamos. This is pathetic newsmaking. Bear is little more then a doll with a “pull string”, saying the exact same thing every time and Shamos shouldn’t be allowed to do anything but apologize for his wildly off-mark appraisals of these machines in the past. I suspect he hasn’t changed his mind other then to try to save his credibility, and has done much to put us in this position to begin with.

It reminds me of Tony Blakely, who is on the Diane Rheam show about every two weeks and says something so ridiculous that the guests gasp, but then, he is welcomed back two weeks later. It literally makes me cringe to hear him say “good morning Diane”. Actually, I rarely listen to the show any more, because of the blatant right wing slant on the show. It’s always two right wing lunatics “against” someone from Newsweek! This “debating” between people of like views has gotten out of control in the last year all over the media. Someone should do a updated survey.

Blakley, Bear and Shamos are, as we know, the tip of the iceberg. These pundits and “professionals”should be in the unemployment lines, not on my television or in my newspaper.

Any bets on whether these are the only articles that will come out about this? I didn’t think so!

Thank heaven for BradBlog and Bev Harris! We've got to keep up the pressure, and increase it at every opportunity on every front, none more than this arrant election fraud. Persistence WILL pay off, but MORE AND MORE pressure on every front is the order of the day.
=======================
On another unrelated subject, uh, Brad,

"propAganda" not "propOganda"

It's not that the word shares the prefix "propo" with words like "proposal" — "propo" is not a prefix

The joint is after "pro": that's all they share.

Following that preposition, the root of the word is the verb "pangere" to fix, specifically "to set slips", ie., to propagate a plant by many cuttings into existing rooted stock.